Thoughts on finishing the current (and maybe last) phase of work
- The work product is to be a set of logical predicates (classes and
properties), expressed in OWL, together with explanation and
rationale.
- Decide that we are documenting the design of web architecture, not
reality. So this is not an ontology project, really, as it is not
empirically based. Call it a 'quasi-ontology' (QO). It can be
applied to reality only to the extent that reality adheres to the design.
- Deal with 'representations': content, media type, language.
- Introduce 'information resource' as something that 'has
representations' (different ones at different times) and pretty much
nothing else. (maybe some 'phlogiston')
- Talk about properties of IRs as a way of explaining purpose.
Purpose of IR idea = saying things about them. Content invariants
(e.g. author, title, publisher, date, subject, media type, language,
...). Lawful variation (weather in Oaxaca, news.google.com, blogs).
- Optional topic: Versions and stability (e.g. as practiced at w3.org).
- Suggest ways to interpret various situations in terms of the QO.
Files as IRs. HTTP as revealing information about IRs (their
representations). Expires: , Content-location: , and so on.
Status codes.
- What HTTP redirects tell us (in terms of the QO). Additional
predicates, if needed. "Cafeteria" approach, meaning offer a choice
of ways to interpret redirects in the QO.
- The 'describes' relation. Interpreting 303 and RDF-based fragid
definitions.
- Optional: Fragid semantics in general.
- Optional: Link relations (Link: and /.well-known/host-meta)
- Check against use cases (which we'll have to re-collect, I think
they're scattered)
- Disclaimers (when this breaks down)
- Comparison with other work (IRW, IAO, etc)
- Choose class and property URIs and prepare OWL file and report.